Should OtLand Open New OtServerlist site?

[Night Wolf]

@xinn, another logical fallacy, this one is called argumentum ad hominem. You didn't replied any of my inqueries, you are just trying to discredit my argument using old and out of context posts.
My server failed because of me, that's true. But what I said is also true. Both things can coexist.
I failed to understand what people really wanted and tried to deliver what they told me they wanted, it's also why I have so much experience in that regarding because after this epic fail I looked for alternatives and to understand more deeply how this all works. What I said about playerbase is also true, they just want to feel they can deliver an impact, being through dominating a server or have the sense of progression, but this only makes sense when you have a crowded server. The more people to see you dominating, the better is the feeling of dominance, therefore more addict you get to it.

I understand that years in this line of work you feel tempted to say good servers get credit but it's not what I've seen, there are a lot of injustices.
I could name a few but it's not up to me judge how other teams choose to win money, all I can say is that's a huge difference between being a good server and getting a high amount of players.

Now back to what you told about creating opportunities, we all know this is the kind of shit you hear from coaches and born-rich people that call themselves entrepreneurs. In reality it's not so simple and marketing is way more important for creating a company than actually doing good job.

I could give you thousands of examples but I will just mention one that is way more closer to you: otservlist.

 

[ruth]

The OTServList rules do not only allow counting more than 4 MCs from one IP, there is no mention of a player record, which is confirmed by the fact that @xinn indicated this code as the correct solution: https://otland.net/threads/very-important -rules-change-on-otservlist-org.247531 / 3-page post-# 2407794

The interesting fact is that the date differs, maybe it is because otservlist calculates date on its side and doesn't get it from us (in the protocol I don't see anything from sending it).

By the way, the number of online players on otservlist is still underestimated here, because we even limit the counting of players from our US proxy server, if we improved it it would give maybe up to 150 players more during peak hours (thanks for the reminder, we will take care of it as soon as possible!).

 

[xinn]

@kay:
Because on 04/08/2020 20:28 otservlist recorded adjusted peak of 1211 players online. Adjusted peak of 1216 was recorded on 5/08. That's why the data is different.

The idea is that otservlist can't blindly trust the peak record returned by the server. So the peak is adjusted to the current maximal accepted peak which is based on the reported number of players + margin error.

I've just checked top 10 servers and it seems that they all accept mc's over 4/IP (but count them correctly).
Shivera has the lowest number of mc's exceeding that limit: 867 characters in game, 840 returned active players.

@Night Wolf:
You can call it ad-hominem I just find it funny. No hard feelings. It's always funny when there are people telling me how I am supposed to run my businesses, listen to my clients et cetera when they clearly failed theirs. This is especially funny since instead of looking how you can improve things you just said that your server failed because of spoiled players So clearly you didn't understand their needs or couldn't adapt to them.

 

[kay]

The OTServList rules do not only allow counting more than 4 MCs from one IP, there is no mention of a player record

The idea is that otservlist can't blindly trust the peak record returned by the server. So the peak is adjusted to the current maximal accepted peak which is based on the reported number of players + margin error.

Amusing

 

[LordCompi]

Well, Kay explained it all exactly

xD



xDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

 

[Night Wolf]

You can call it ad-hominem I just find it funny. No hard feelings. It's always funny when there are people telling me how I am supposed to run my businesses, listen to my clients et cetera when they clearly failed theirs. This is especially funny since instead of looking how you can improve things you just said that your server failed because of spoiled players So clearly you didn't understand their needs or couldn't adapt to them.

There's no feelings involved, I'm just trying to help you but you're making it harder than it actually is.
My server was always a hobby, it's a safeplace for studying and applying theories. Of course I won't be right everytime, otherwise it would be boring and wouldn't be helpful at all for me growing as a person. Embracing failure is something completely differently than being complacent about it which you're clearly showcasing here. But again, why this fixation with my server? You went really deeper in my history of posting just to find something that you could use? ¯\(ツ)/¯

You think this is showing who I am but it's way more telling who you really are....
In your limited mind, I'm criticizing your work so you had to fight back and critize mine? Why are you being so defensive about it? If I wanted to attack you, all I had to do was finish my spoof system and post also the scripts for forging vpn connections in the host. That would not only save all the hours I have spent in this stupid discussion but would also show you that I was right all along. That's the magic about science, it is what is and doesn't care about what you think or what you have to say.

 

[Adposatnr]

i love to test some servers even those with 10 online cuz they could be funny(anyone watching my stream when i test "iglica brazolska") ofc if its real counter... miss time when ppl wouldnt look at online counter like "oh 500 on DED OTS" cause they are used to 1400 online numbers on counter and 100 people actually playing

that one should be adjusted asap even now ppl asking me if i'll test these funny servers again but... finding one around those with fake online is really really hard and with every year less and less people try making these servers

 

[Source]

Xinn bans servers who leave proof they spoof, he doesnt care about anything else. If you eliminate the proof that you are spoofing, he will not ban you. Which is the environment we see in OTservlist today.. some people are better at it and some are lazier at it XD.

For reference, this is basically what I've been arguing with Xinn over for the past two days in a different thread, and he's basically admitted at this point that he has absolutely no solution to cavebotters or "well done" spoofers and that he's not going to look for one either, as he says, unless it's "100% proof", which is really just a meaningless term/abuse of language since none of his current heuristic techniques are "100% fool-proof solutions" either, which could explain why so many people complain about him if he thinks heuristics are "100% fool-proof solutions", whatever.
The discussion can be found here: The problem we have with top list Of ot server list (https://otland.net/threads/the-problem-we-have-with-top-list-of-ot-server-list.271937/post-2622542)

 

[Ahilphino]

You guys keep saying "botting same thing as spoofing".

U are dumb or what?????? Majority of tibia players enjoy botting, u bot the boring grind parts then u have fun in pvp and quests. So u want Xinn to ruin his serverlist and remove bot servers/or sort them worse? But majority players s likes Botting so his site will be worst for the actual users then, tibia playuers likes botting, its why 8.6 is still most popular Version.

Majority of ot players are not on otland. Here are devs and more "hardcore" players.


@kay Imo urs server is really good, but u are really shooting urself in the foot by not having your server on there. Just look, there is not many oldschool servers, All ur players are real so with 150 players it's still good number especially if we only look at oldschool servers, and being on the list for some months ur server would be high up there. Just free players for you. 0 Payment Required.

 

[Adposatnr]

U are dumb or what?????? Majority of tibia players enjoy botting, u bot the boring grind parts then u have fun in pvp and quests. So u want Xinn to ruin his serverlist and remove bot servers/or sort them worse? But majority players s likes Botting so his site will be worst for the actual users then, tibia playuers likes botting, its why 8.6 is still most popular Version.

cause often if u bot one char u bot aswell few others and if server allows full afk botting its often 5min to run them and cyaaa for whole day afk auto bless auto refill and nothing wrong with it! but these servers shouldnt be next to bot-free ones

just imagine retrocores or realesta 7.4 with a lot of runemakers on bot and many many mcs if u remove these runemakers and bots from 1300 online it drops to 300 or even less its easy to notice on server launch for example retrocores azera start 200 online at launch 2 days later 1000 online

 

[LordCompi]

So u want Xinn to ruin his serverlist and remove bot servers/or sort them worse? But majority players s likes Botting so his site will be worst for the actual users then, tibia playuers likes botting, its why 8.6 is still most popular Version.

xD


This is irrevelant, bots destroyed this game 10+ yrs ago
Bury this shit (called once as ot scene), it is worth nothing

 

[Source]

So u want Xinn to ruin his serverlist and remove bot servers/or sort them worse?

All he "has" to do is separate bot servers from non-bot servers with a simple UI checkbox or something similar.
Both botters and non-botters will benefit from it since botters will then easily be able to find botting-servers and non-botters will be able to easily find no-botting-servers.

 

[LordCompi]

 

[xKrazyx]

You guys keep saying "botting same thing as spoofing".

U are dumb or what?????? Majority of tibia players enjoy botting, u bot the boring grind parts then u have fun in pvp and quests. So u want Xinn to ruin his serverlist and remove bot servers/or sort them worse? But majority players s likes Botting so his site will be worst for the actual users then, tibia playuers likes botting, its why 8.6 is still most popular Version.

Majority of ot players are not on otland. Here are devs and more "hardcore" players.


@kay Imo urs server is really good, but u are really shooting urself in the foot by not having your server on there. Just look, there is not many oldschool servers, All ur players are real so with 150 players it's still good number especially if we only look at oldschool servers, and being on the list for some months ur server would be high up there. Just free players for you. 0 Payment Required.

many servers use spoofed/virtualized connections to make fake bots that look like players. Half the time now spoof and bot can be the same thing. There are real player bots and server spoofed bots. Both being drivin by AI its nearly impossible to tell the difference as a mere player playing the server.

It bypasses any checks xinn has unless he examines the server manually and thoroughly. most of these servers I feel are the ones buying banners and count downs half the time ( not all ofc)

these client/server connection spoofs work as runemakers/house sitters/depot sitters/cave bots. Some servers go as far to add fake xp and fake deaths to these chars xD its hilarious. i imagine some servers go even deeper i cant even imagine.

many 3rd parties for this. my company in rl has used this one but there are many parties that can provide this solution

Products A-Z | Product Suites | Micro Focus | OpenText

Browse Micro Focus' full software product list that includes solutions to help you build, test, and secure the apps your enterprise needs.

www.microfocus.com

with virtualization tech now its WIDE OPEN...

One of the only defenses against this that I know of is ingress filtering... which cant be done externally and can be expensive on a case by case basis.

its all a joke

 

[kay]

@kay Imo urs server is really good, but u are really shooting urself in the foot by not having your server on there. Just look, there is not many oldschool servers, All ur players are real so with 150 players it's still good number especially if we only look at oldschool servers, and being on the list for some months ur server would be high up there. Just free players for you. 0 Payment Required.

Thanks for good words. As for the rest, I think you missed the point. The fact that we could possibly - somehow - to a certain degree - compete without faking our numbers is irrelevant. We just see no sense in such competition. In our opinion it is cancerous for the OT scene and we don't want to be associated with it anyhow. It is what caused all that "dedot dedot" madness. People should go back to enjoying the game instead of focusing on those absurdly inflated and often meaningless numbers. You should stop believing we're all dependant on some servers' list service (no, we're not). Tibiantis goal is to build a real community, let it be small, but real. That's why we chose that path.
If there was a reliable and trustworthy service, that would offer something more than just publishing your IP - I would gladly pay twice what otservlist "features" cost. It's not about money.

I do agree with you on a lot of things. I've even mentioned what counter-measurements will be added to otservlist (like the ability to filter out non-botting servers or introducing something like "mc ratio factor").

You do agree, yet you have done nothing in the past dozen years.
You are right that if something works well, there's no need to change it just for the change. But as I've already explained, otservlist in its shape made sense 15 years ago. Times changed and there are valid reasons of why such service should've changed as well. To me - you're only profitting of people's habits, the fact that they got used to it, and nothing else. Of course, it is your right to run your service the way you like, I fully agree on that. But it is my right to state what I think about that and why people should give up on using it already.

If it would become the main source of advertisement, server owners would adapt to it and start doing it. Or maybe they already did but you haven't realised that? You come from Poland, you must have heard about znanylekarz or gowork and their problems regarding reviews.

Otland is the main source (or one of) of advertisement for Tibiantis and we haven't experienced the issue with any "fake reviews". Sure there're always those guys that want to bash on you for no valid reason, but whatever, it's a freedom of speech. And when they cross the line between criticism and mindless hating, moderators deal with them without even me asking for it. Maybe you could connect servers' profiles to their otland threads?
I am all aware that it's not all that simple, I am also aware of what you called "human's nature", and that every proposed feature may cause alot of issues. I know it's not easy and many people demand things without giving it a thought, as if it was a wish concert. The thing is you're not looking at it as something to overcome, or not trying to come up with anything better. You're using it as excuses to convince people that things should stay as they are. You did not convince me, and I still think otservlist is a past, sorry.

 

[Kuzyn]

@xinn
Dunno why people ask for this voting system, the most popular servers will be even more popular... (haters vs real big player base).

I just wanted to ask you about adding few simple things:

• possibility to set "custom" exp rate, which doesnt follow rl tibia pattern
• "OTC" in client filter instead of forcing us to pick "n/a"
• new filter with simple info, BOTS: YES/NO - if they are allowed or not.

 

[Ochman]

@kay;
@LordCompi;
@Kuzyn;
@Source;
@Night Wolf;
Give me a reliable way to find out how many real people are playing a server and I'm onto doing otservlist alternative without it being some relict of the past.
Because I do agree with most of your accusations towards xinn, but how can you expect that he manually goes to each server, checks it, and says something like "Well, this looks like a spoof, let's mark it this way". And don't even try to say "it's obvious", because if you cannot prove it - is it really?

 

[LordCompi]

There is no 100% prove that online list is not spoofed. You can crawl through OTS website and collect such data as highscores, online time etc.
Like this: Tibiantis Info - Powergamers (https://tibiantis.info/stats/powergamers/1)
Then you can see how many players did something in past day but it still can be manipulated by owner.
Reviews are also good option in my opinion, of couse it still can be spoil and reviews can be purchased by owners.
There is also need of some kind of rating institution on list where in reliable way basing on immeasurable data as players comments, community around server to make an assessment.
Combining the above-mentioned things imho is the only way to lead this list.

For sure much better than doing nothing for 15 years

 

[Merrok]

@xinn
Dunno why people ask for this voting system, the most popular servers will be even more popular... (haters vs real big player base).

I just wanted to ask you about adding few simple things:

• possibility to set "custom" exp rate, which doesnt follow rl tibia pattern
• "OTC" in client filter instead of forcing us to pick "n/a"
• new filter with simple info, BOTS: YES/NO - if they are allowed or not.

I'd see this as just examples. But I agree that more options in general, not just the ones you mentioned but even more than that, should be given to OT owners. This does not mean that you need to be able to sort by all or that all those options need to be shown by default in the list, be creative.

@kay;
@LordCompi;
@Kuzyn;
@Source;
@Night Wolf;
Give me a reliable way to find out how many real people are playing a server and I'm onto doing otservlist alternative without it being some relict of the past.
Because I do agree with most of your accusations towards xinn, but how can you expect that he manually goes to each server, checks it, and says something like "Well, this looks like a spoof, let's mark it this way". And don't even try to say "it's obvious", because if you cannot prove it - is it really?

Well, a reliable way is hard to find for anything. Noone can expect someone to do this manually in this kind of "business".
The question is: is it worth it?
Don't understand me wrong, I'd love to see it. Competition is always good.
But is it worth your time and effort to try and do that in the OT Community? If you have fun doing it and wanna do it for personal reasons, go for it! But out of the need might not be advantageous for you personally. It might sound egoistic, but you should always think of yourself and if it's good for you.

There is no 100% prove that online list is not spoofed. You can crawl through OTS website and collect such data as highscores, online time etc.
Like this: Tibiantis Info - Powergamers (https://tibiantis.info/stats/powergamers/1)
Then you can see how many players did something in past day but it still can be manipulated by owner.
Reviews are also good option in my opinion, of couse it still can be spoil and reviews can be purchased by owners.
There is also need of some kind of rating institution on list where in reliable way basing on immeasurable data as players comments, community around server to make an assessment.
Combining the above-mentioned things imho is the only way to lead this list.

For sure much better than doing nothing for 15 years

I can only repeat what I said earlier. I agree with xinn that reviews are not a good idea. For the simple reason that it's way too much work to maintain. You do not want to have that work. Noone does. Same thing as I mentioned above.
I actually had the idea to do this myself years ago. Actually in a bigger way. Having separate rating from normal users and people trusted with their reviews. Kind of like that game rating website does it nowadays. I can't remember the name right now and it's not worth the effort looking it up.
But a question would also be: Do people look at those rating? Does it really matter? Is it worth the effort?
For games it isn't. People look at it, but statistically that is not what ultimately decided whether they buy a game or not. So would this work for OTS?
Anyone is welcome to try. I actually think it would be great to have it simply to see if it works, if it's worth the effort, if you can trust people more than you'd think (in my experience no). But I'm not gonna ask for it. I cannot expect anyone else to do it if I don't want to.

 

[LordCompi]

I can only repeat what I said earlier. I agree with xinn that reviews are not a good idea. For the simple reason that it's way too much work to maintain. You do not want to have that work. Noone does. Same thing as I mentioned above.

Yea, better is to collecting cash and doing nothing